Despite schools being the only thing open for much of wave 2 in the UK, living w/ children associated with marginal increased absolute risk of COVID-19 infection/hospitalisation, and no increase in death
The study compared hospital records of over 9mil adults <65yrs during wave 1 and wave 2, comparing those who lived with children (split by primary and secondary age) to those who don't
They adjusted for covariates such as deprivation, age, BMI, smoking, etc
2/7
Wave 1: No difference in outcomes, except much lower risk of death for people with children
Wave 2: Tiny increase risk in infection and hospitalisation for those living with children (smaller for young children), but same or lower risk of death from COVID-19 or any cause.
3/7
The important factor here is that for a large proportion of wave 2, the whole country was in lockdown *except schools*
This means we could not have pushed much more of the risk of exposure on to schools if we had tried
4/7
Importantly, these types of studies are full of factors we can't account for
People with children will inherently behave differently to those without
Hence a similar study from Scotland found the opposite; living with children = lower risk!
But is this variant especially scary in children? ☠️
Are they suddenly driving infections? 🚗
Is this quadruple worrisome? 😱🚨⚠️
Let's take a look at the evidence
1
b.1.1.7 became of concern initially following a surge of cases in SE England after autumn lockdown
Case trends in children had previously lagged adults by a week or so (because adults drive infection rates), but this surge happened near simultaneously
These numbers are roughly accurate, but do not reflect anything like a comparable scenario to spring
These children are MUCH less unwell, due to a combination of recognising less severe cases, early management, and perhaps a degree of over diagnosis to be on the safe side
2/4
Only a couple of patients per day are even unwell enough to be enrolled in the worlds only clinical trial for this condition, the RECOVERY trial
Very few cases of coronary artery aneurysms, which even after spring resolved for most children over follow up
3/4
They use age specific mortality data to eliminate bias from undertesting of cases, alongside mobility and contact data
They found adults age 20 - 49 are the origins of most infections
This did not change over time, nor with school reopenings
2/5
Conclusion:
"This study provides evidence that the resurgent COVID-19 epidemics in the US in 2020 have been driven by adults aged 20-49, and in particular adults aged 35-49, before and after school reopening."
3/5
I've seen suggestions that the idea younger children might be less susceptible to infection with #COVID19 is a "myth", based on children just not being tested enough
That is untrue!
Whilst it's true children are under tested, this is not where this idea came from!
1/8
It comes from household contact tracing studies
When someone in a home is identified as being infected, the other members of the house are tested to see if they are infected
It's a useful experiment as everyone at home gets very similar exposure
2/8
Some early studies did only test contacts with symptoms, but actually most large studies since then have tested ALL close contacts REGARDLESS of symptoms